This weekly roundup thread is intended for all culture war posts. 'Culture war' is vaguely defined, but it basically means controversial issues that fall along set tribal lines. Arguments over culture war issues generate a lot of heat and little light, and few deeply entrenched people ever change their minds. This thread is for voicing opinions and analyzing the state of the discussion while trying to optimize for light over heat.
Optimistically, we think that engaging with people you disagree with is worth your time, and so is being nice! Pessimistically, there are many dynamics that can lead discussions on Culture War topics to become unproductive. There's a human tendency to divide along tribal lines, praising your ingroup and vilifying your outgroup - and if you think you find it easy to criticize your ingroup, then it may be that your outgroup is not who you think it is. Extremists with opposing positions can feed off each other, highlighting each other's worst points to justify their own angry rhetoric, which becomes in turn a new example of bad behavior for the other side to highlight.
We would like to avoid these negative dynamics. Accordingly, we ask that you do not use this thread for waging the Culture War. Examples of waging the Culture War:
-
Shaming.
-
Attempting to 'build consensus' or enforce ideological conformity.
-
Making sweeping generalizations to vilify a group you dislike.
-
Recruiting for a cause.
-
Posting links that could be summarized as 'Boo outgroup!' Basically, if your content is 'Can you believe what Those People did this week?' then you should either refrain from posting, or do some very patient work to contextualize and/or steel-man the relevant viewpoint.
In general, you should argue to understand, not to win. This thread is not territory to be claimed by one group or another; indeed, the aim is to have many different viewpoints represented here. Thus, we also ask that you follow some guidelines:
-
Speak plainly. Avoid sarcasm and mockery. When disagreeing with someone, state your objections explicitly.
-
Be as precise and charitable as you can. Don't paraphrase unflatteringly.
-
Don't imply that someone said something they did not say, even if you think it follows from what they said.
-
Write like everyone is reading and you want them to be included in the discussion.
On an ad hoc basis, the mods will try to compile a list of the best posts/comments from the previous week, posted in Quality Contribution threads and archived at /r/TheThread. You may nominate a comment for this list by clicking on 'report' at the bottom of the post and typing 'Actually a quality contribution' as the report reason.
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
Notes -
I've said from the day after the attack: don't. Don't conduct a war. Utilize the international sympathy to get a peace deal and trade normalization signed with KSA and any other comers. The purpose of the Hamas operation was to provoke this attack. Launching it torpedos Israeli odds of peace for twenty years. At this point Israel has already blown world sympathy with idiotic spectacle like finding Hitler in the wreckage of a teenage girl's bedroom, but when you're in a hole stop digging.
https://www.themotte.org/post/753/culture-war-roundup-for-the-week/158050?context=8#context
I think it was likely that political pressures in Israel meant that a primarily non-violent response would not have been acceptable. Yes, Israel could have used the rush of international sympathy as diplomatic capital, but Israelis want a lot of Palestinians to die for this, and would vote for whoever promised that.
And a great leader is someone who doesn't give in to political pressure to "do something." Just because the public wants something doesn't make it smart. Just because you have to "do something" for a fake ass conceit like national honor doesn't justify doing something idiotic with little or no upside.
The only possible good outcome for Israel at this point is probably complete Gazacide, which I'm not sure is politically possible.
Regardless, it's likely the urge to see Gazans die could have been sated by a brief bombing campaign.
Great leaders don't give in to mass pressure. Whether it's the pressure to make peace, like Chamberlain, or the pressure to make war.
That may be tolerable for someone who wasn't Netanyahu. Netanyahu built his image on being the Great Defender, while simultaneously burning his political capital with his corruption and mismanagement. Maybe another leader could've weathered the storm in trying to show restraint, but Netanyahu had to strike back disproportionately. Every Palestinian killed works towards rebuilding his position.
If he actually was a great leader, he first of all wouldn't have gotten into this situation in the first place, but he would have sacrificed his reputation and his political career for the benefit of Israel once he did end up in this situation.
More options
Context Copy link
What makes netanyahu so important? Ask him Sacrifice himself for his country, the way he is sacrificing Israeli soldiers and Gazan civilians.
One of the strange things about this war is what people take as "given" and what they think is flexible. We're asked to accept that bibi must be a selfish fool, but we must ask that everyone decouple when it comes to bombing hospitals and consider the greater good.
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link